Wasserman Schultz strikes again: “We own the economy,” she says

posted at 4:25 pm on June 15, 2011 by Tina Korbe

She’s not backing down. Let the Republican National Committee poke all the fun it wants, Democratic National Committee chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz stands by what she said: The nation is in an economic turnaround and Democrats deserve the credit.

“We own the economy. We own the beginning of the turnaround and we want to make sure that we continue that pace of recovery, not go back to the policies of the past under the Bush administration that put us in the ditch in the first place,” Wasserman Schultz told Mike Allen at a breakfast hosted by POLITICO’s Playbook.

The economy, she said, “has turned around” since President Obama took office, with steady job growth evident even if the pace leaves something to be desired.

The facts highlighted in the RNC’s most recent video deserve review: 9.1 percent unemployment. More than 6 million foreclosures. About 1 million construction jobs lost. Some 865,000 manufacturing jobs lost. An enormous $3.7 trillion added to the national debt. Three straight record high deficits. Strange equation for an economic turnaround!

But DWS said something else at the Politico Playbook breakfast — something unrelated to the economy, but, with which, I — much to my chagrin — half-heartedly agree. It’s unfair, Wasserman-Schultz said, for the media to pit former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) against one another as (potential) presidential candidates just because they’re both women.

“Even though I don’t agree with either Sarah Palin or Michele Bachmann on virtually anything,” she said, to laughter from the audience, “I do think the unique scrutiny … because of their gender” and “highlighting the potential conflict between them” is a product of the media’s desire for juicy storylines. “I think it’s inappropriate.”

But, even in this, Wasserman-Schultz is two days late and trillions of dollars short: Since Monday, when Bachmann wowed viewers at the second GOP presidential debate, the Bachmann v. Palin storyline seems especially tired (not that it has died down — Google News turns up new stories on the theme pretty reliably every 15 minutes or so — but it should have). Speculation about a Palin presidential run continues, but Bachmann is clearly a candidate in her own right, not merely an alternative to Palin (or an establishment obstacle to Palin pitching her hat in the ring).

Either way, Wasserman-Schultz is right about identity politics — she just failed to recognize which side feeds that. Plenty of room over here on the right for as many people — men and women alike — as want to articulate the truth clearly. Guess that means Wasserman-Schultz need not apply.

Update: This post originally mistakenly said the CNN debate Monday was the “first” GOP presidential debate, when, in fact, it was the second.

Comments

I doubt that investigation will ever reach any conclusion, but will *somehow* conveniently just go poof in the night after months/years of “investigating it”.

Which is pretty much what happened when my Rep, Richard Baker (R-LA), ripped into them in the early 2000s. Bawney Fwank and the other Dems on the panel played the “racist witch hunt” card in an attempt to protect Franklin Raines, which didn’t quite work, while also declaring Fannie and Freddie to be completely solvent.

Who in their right mind would promise the VP slot (for instance) to any other candidate this early? What if that candidate fails spectacularly? What if they fall victim to scandal? How many would have gamed out who the best VP pick would be to enhance their general election chances this early?

And sometimes people promise things they don’t intend to deliver, or leave themselves “outs.” I’m pretty sure she’s getting something for this. If she were running forreals, she wouldn’t have hired Ed Rollins and she would care about her fans being upset with her. Obviously it doesn’t bother her, which tells me she’s not actually running to win.

I doubt that investigation will ever reach any conclusion, but will *somehow* conveniently just go poof in the night after months/years of “investigating it”. — Lourdes…

Which is pretty much what happened when my Rep, Richard Baker (R-LA), ripped into them in the early 2000s. Bawney Fwank and the other Dems on the panel played the “racist witch hunt” card in an attempt to protect Franklin Raines, which didn’t quite work, while also declaring Fannie and Freddie to be completely solvent.

teke184 on June 15, 2011 at 5:47 PM

WHICH IS WHY I have tried to point out earlier here (my first two comments on Page One here) as to Wasserman-Schultz’s squirrely manipulations of issues.

Using these EMOTIONAL=BASED ISSUES that *might exist* in some people at any time in history or *could exist* in someone’s perceptions somewhere — things like “war against women” and “you hate women” and “you’re a racist” and “it’s a racist witch-hunt” to investigate Fannie-Freddie, yadda, yadda, yadda…these are PLOYS used by the Left to both ease their political goals into place while keeping people distracted based upon these emotional if not often irrational issues.

Wasserman-Schultz has so far made many public condemnations of the Right (which means, about many millions of American citizens, taxpayers and voters, that’s who she’s condemning) claiming falsely that there’s this “war against women” and now she’s attempting to pit GOP candidates against one another on some victimization-card as women, with her and the Left there to “uphold women” or some such rubbish…

It’s rubbish! It’s political gaming! First she/they/Democrats declare these issues exist, when they don’t, then they go about perpetuating the lies with themselves as The Good and the Right as The Bad based upon these false-flag declarations.

W-S is actually quite insulting about women, of any or all political parties, in her screwy condemnations of women, which is what she’s actually stating: women are too hapless to think things through and protect themselves so the Democrats “must” do so…it’s insulting to the gender she’s trying to claim are the Handiest Victim Class in Twon.

And sometimes people promise things they don’t intend to deliver, or leave themselves “outs.” I’m pretty sure she’s getting something for this. If she were running forreals, she wouldn’t have hired Ed Rollins and she would care about her fans being upset with her. Obviously it doesn’t bother her, which tells me she’s not actually running to win.

alwaysfiredup on June 15, 2011 at 5:53 PM

Of course she’ll be getting something out of it- an increased profile, a big pile of PAC money, book sales, etc.

How many (sane and sober) people think that Ron Paul has the slightest chances of winning? Did “the establishment” or another candidate prod him to run for the sake of derailing Palin?

How about Newt or Gary (who?) Johnson? What were they promised? What deals with “the establishment” and/or other candidates did they make to entice them into running? How many people think they’re in it to win it?

Vyce, we’ve repeatedly had this discussion. I think the disconnect between the NoVA Dems and the rest of the state will keep Kaine from being a serious contender, no matter how high the turnout is in Arlington and other areas.

And that’s not even getting into how Kaine has gone pretty far off the reservation from where he was as Governor, before his anointed successor got his *ss handed to him in the wake of HopeNChange.

teke184 on June 15, 2011 at 5:34 PM

You know me, so you probably remember that I’m not exactly high on Kaine. He wasn’t a popular governor here in VA like his predecessor, Mark Warner, was.

My point was simply that there ARE enough liberals in NoVa that the Democrat candidate, by default, will pull in a decent amount of support.

Why does anyone think you can simply borrow print and spend money and think that will turn the economy around? And if it really did do you not think that such inefficient use of money does not come with a cost? The opportunity cost is muy large.
In our own lives most of us would not simply pave our driveway just so Joe the Paver could have a job. SO much insanity.

“Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States; and, Debbie Wasserman Schultz shall reimburse the people of the United States for costs incurred as a direct result of her ignorance, and the abuse of the condiment known as ‘mayonnaise'”.

None of those other candidates have the same appeal to Palin voters as Bachmann, plus she has the added benefit of offering Romney cover for sexism accusations.

alwaysfiredup on June 15, 2011 at 6:16 PM

And finally we get to the obvious conclusion: If candidate’s campaign especially threatens Palin’s chances, their run can only be the result of an “establishment” / MSM conspiracy against her and only her.

Wasserman-Schultz first declares that there’s some sort of arch-opposition by the Right “to women” and pits women against women, party women against party women, when no actual “war against women” exists on the Right. Lourdes on June 15, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Not exactly…she accurately states its the media and no one I know thinks the media is Right… I think she is doing this because with two women running in the GOP, Dem women might say hmmm maybe I’ll vote Republican… that’s what I think they are afraid of…and the first woman president being a Republican.

Wasserman-Schultz first declares that there’s some sort of arch-opposition by the Right “to women” and pits women against women, party women against party women, when no actual “war against women” exists on the Right. Lourdes on June 15, 2011 at 5:01 PM

Not exactly…she accurately states its the media and no one I know thinks the media is Right… I think she is doing this because with two women running in the GOP, Dem women might say hmmm maybe I’ll vote Republican… that’s what I think they are afraid of…and the first woman president being a Republican.

CCRWM on June 15, 2011 at 8:39 PM

Whether her blame target is “media” or “republicans” or “men” or “Conservatives,” it doesn’t matter because it’s the false-flag political ploy that she’s playing, that the Democrats rely on routinely. They inevitably turn the attention away from their blame-target, also, to the opposition, so call it USING “the media” as mere excuse to avoid stating reality: it’s the Democrats who create this and continue to promote this (or their various other false-flags).

I agree with your guess there, though, that the fear for Democrats is that a woman among the Republican Party may be the first female President. But read more closely my earlier remarks if you care to, have time to, because I do think I hit the nail on the head with most of what I’ve already written.

It’s this methodology of ‘politicking’ by the Left that I’m pointing out. Their excuses (false-flags) remain the same, just dressed in a variety of seasonal blame-targets.

And, also, blaming “the media” by a DNC head is certainly ridiculous, since “the media” is the DNC and vice-versa. Debbie’s thinking cap fell off.

How long can the moderate left hold out against the radical left in the Democratic Party? They will all ‘own the economy’ and it is an anchor taking them directly to the abyss. Sooner or later those ties will be cut… and then the fun really starts.

Okay, now every time they say the name “Bush”, they can say, “but you own it”…
Any debate where the dem starts of with “inherited”, Debbie’s name and quote “But your DNC chair says you own it”…

right2bright on June 15, 2011 at 6:37 PM

Exactly right! Work in the phrase “the failed policies of the Obama administration” as often as possible so that it begins to work into the consciousness of the general public. Once the phrase becomes used enough in blog posts, it may catch on as an algorythm on ‘Net searches.

*MY* complaint, at least my concerns, are that the Right responds to these false-flag attacks by the DNC. Some of those responding to it are here among the comments…so easily falling victim to taking-up the DNC false assumptions and then running with them, and thus, proliferating them using various other add-ons.

The whole “war on women” and “you’re a racist” and “you hate women/gays/blacks/New Orleans/cities/GM/WHATEVER…” things are DNC false flags. They should not be accepted nor argued as if they were valid because that’s the game terminology the DNC is after. One hears or reads the DNC with these various false accusations about others (whoever they’re targeting) and as one contributes to such, it simply plays the Left’s game for them.

The only limitations as to “women” I hear or read about are coming from people like Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and other Democrats. That means, the limitations are theirs, not anyone else’s.

I must have it backwards – now, it is the media that has pitted Michelle against Sarah? There is an agenda and the biggest change has been with Matthews C4P did an analysis Gosh, Michelle’s hiring the backstabbing Ed Rollins to take her down must mean he works for the media. This is the reason I will not support her again. This was unforgiveable and BAchmann is completely unapologetic because Rollins is stillthere…

Michell started the inter-party war and lost my vote. YEP I could care how well she “performs” Let the left play those games. If America wants to see Sarah as a candidate, the last people on earth to try to stop her should be the GOP and a woman in the GOP ought to know better. I know a lot of GOP women who love Sarah and if you look at the rallys it more women then men. That is another lie that women don’t like Sarah …maybe Leftist or fundamentalist women… but conservative women like her.This isn’t hockey – it’s for our survival and we respond by approving of backstabbing from our own? 2012 may go down in history as the year the USA finally fell.

Debbie-baby, when the next unemployment figures come out showing more people out of work and the economic numbers are pretty much in the toilet as well, you’re DAMNED right you will own the economy and what you idiot Democrat boneheads did to it! You will own every inch of it!

I wonder if the Democrat party now realizes what an awful mistake Obama was. His policies have already caused one rout at the polls with another only 15 months off. His appointment of this walking gaffe machine must be driving the remaining “moderate” in the party nuts. The only benefit she has is that Pelosi looks sane by comparison.